I am an American citizen. I was born in the 80’s. I grew up
watching the explosion of information that we call the internet. I watched
family telephones be disconnected from walls and cellular variants distributed
to individuals. Every day I get up and check my email using broad band business
class internet. Right now I type this on one of three monitors on a singular
computer system.
I live in this world where a powerful computer lives in my
pocket. I call it a telephone but it does a lot more than make calls, in fact,
making calls is one of the least spectacular features it has to offer. Lately
I’ve nurtured a slight addiction to “Bad Piggies”, an angry birds spin-off
game.
You know, that other thing I was slightly addicted to for a while.
This is the world I live in so when I hear questions like
“Do you really need that?” I really do stop and think about the answer.
Sometimes I think the answer gets more thought than the question. Do you need
that cheeseburger? Do you need salt and pepper? Do you really need the boots
you just got or the clever car you drive?
This seems to raise the question of purpose. Take the car
you drive. If you don’t need a truck you are more inclined to buy a car unless
you live in a place like Texas where the pickup is just a thing in just about
every driveway. Maybe that has something to do with us being a tad more
independent… or maybe we’re just more inclined to lean towards the redneck
stereotype.
I own a truck. It was purchased from a man named Walter for
one thousand dollars. I spent another six hundred fixing a few things and now
it runs like a top. Did I need it? Yes… well… maybe not. Does it make life a
tad easier? Well, that’s a totally new question now isn’t it? Having the danger
ranger allows me to drive something while my wife has her new car all to
herself. It also allows me to haul stuff for building things.
So the question of “do you need that?” seems to not really
be about what you absolutely have to have. The question might be more
accurately phrased “Is this item suitable for fulfilling a role?”.
I am not an avid hunter or outdoorsman. I am not passionate
about the woods and hunting stuff. What I am passionate about is my family. I
have been issued a command my by Father in heaven to provide for my wife and
son. Loving my family is not optional; it is a requirement for me to be a godly
man. I do not see this as a departure from the pursuit of holiness. To the
contrary I see provision for them as an irrevocable commission.
Do I see a suitable role in my life that an aluminum chassis, box fed,
modern rifle can fulfill?
Absolutely.
Provision without defense is no provision at all. Here’s the
deal. I am a Christian, not a pacifist. I will use violence to protect my
family from all enemies foreign and domestic. We are not warmongers or action
film junkies. We are fathers. We are husbands.
We are shepherds who do not negotiate with wolves; we
put them in the dirt.
So the next time you feel the need to ask someone “Do you
really need a semi-auto rifle that shoots 30 bullets per mag?” I only ask that
you really think about your question.
If you’re asking about the defense of my family… do you really need to ask?
Speaking of false dilemmas... Implying that when someone asks "Do you really need a semi-auto rifle that shoots 30 bullets per mag?" they're somehow impugning your right to defend your family is a great example.
ReplyDeleteAR-15s are crappy for home defense if you live in a suburban area (which I'm assuming you do). A shotgun or handgun are much more effective. The likelihood that you'll need 30 bullets? Well, given that the chance of a home invasion is <3% (based on crime stats for the *entire* West), the chance that YOUR HOME will be invaded by more than one person, and you'll have a need to get off 30 shots is *so small* it's laughable.
Call a spade a spade. Unless you're living in a war zone or fending off a pack of zombies, claiming that it's just another "valid option" for meeting a need is a stretch. Using that logic, a machine gun is also a "valid option."
1. That wasn't my implication. Incidentally you're guilty of a "strawman" fallacy there.
ReplyDelete2. Ar-15's are better than shotguns for home defense. They're easier to shoot accurately and you don't have to worry about over-penetration like you would with buckshot or pistol ammo.
The reason you don't understand this is the same reason you've posted much of your garbage.
You don't really know much about firearms, let alone ballistics, and haven't ever really given thought to how sheetrock interacts with ONE 22 caliber oblong projectile versus NINE 30 caliber STEEL spherical projectiles.
Put it this way. If I shoot a 2x4 with my rifle it'll make a pinhole in the front. If I shoot the same board with my shotgun the board will be cut in half.
The 5.56 mm round is tiny and moves very fast. This is a good thing in a suburban environment because once the bullet hits something it loses a tremendous amount of momentum.
You're one step away from the guy at academy who tells people "yeah shotguns are great cause you really don't have to aim with them".
You're ignorant but that's okay because we can fix that. The irrational bias, on the other hand...
1. It's what you wrote. Not a strawman at all. That or
ReplyDeleteEnglish isn't your first language and you don't understand that your last paragraph quite clearly references your second-to-last.
2. Ignorant garbage, huh? I see...lol. You just google "AR-15 home defense" and see how many other people agree with me that the AR is a crappy choice
for a suburban firefight. You may not like hearing that because you're blinded by your anger towards people who favor some regulation (your irrational bias against gun laws). But you're lionizing it into some perfect weapon and that just isn't true. Plenty of smart gun owners totally disagree with you.
1. I never said "asking if I need an AR is somehow impugning your right to defend your family". I never even implied that.
ReplyDeleteThe strawman falacy is with regard to your assertion that I was implying that merely asking a question about the purpose of a thing was an infringement on my rights. Since I wasn't making that (ridiculous) implication and since you attacked it (the argument I was not making) you are guilty of a strawman falacy.
That's all a strawman fallacy is. Its an attack on a position that I do not hold. I don't hold that position, you attacked it, therefore you've provided a textbook example of this type of fallacy.
2. I don't care how many other ignorant people agree with another ignorant person. Most people don't know the ballistics or the mechanical capabilities of the AR especially in contrast to a shotgun.
I would even venture to say that no one who actually knew what they were talking about would agree with you because you are, quite simply, lacking information and only parroting what you have heard from other parrots.
I told you why the AR is a great weapon for home defense but can you tell me why it isn't?
Of course not, cause you don't know anything about it.
I don't get angry at ignorance. That is a fool's errand.
You should also be careful not to take ignorance as a bad thing necessarily. Its an opportunity to learn. The simple truth is that I know more about this stuff than you. Say what you want but I'm in this little AR15/gun culture thing and you aren't. That means I have a perspective and knowledge base that you don't.
ReplyDeleteHere's what it comes down to you need experience and knowledge OR you need to listen to people that have it.
Either humble yourself and get educated or be dismissed the moment you start saying stuff that simply isn't true.
Its that simple.
Let's break this down: "So the next time you feel the need to ask someone “Do you really need a semi-auto rifle that shoots 30 bullets per mag?” I only ask that you really think about your question.
ReplyDeleteIf you’re asking about the defense of my family… do you really need to ask?"
You are rhetorically equating asking "Do you really need a semi-auto rifle that shoots 30 bullets per mag" with questioning the right to defend your family that you discuss in earlier paragraphs. I didn't say that you thought that the question "infringed" on your rights. There is no strawman here, because I also didn't present an alternate position and argue against it as if you'd said it. What I DID point out is that your rhetorical setup is an example of a false dilemma; there are many other weapons you could use to defend your family, so questioning that particular gun + mag size isn't the same as questioning your right to defend your family. You don't need an AR-15 to defend your family. Plenty of alternatives.
"I told you why the AR is a great weapon for home defense but can you tell me why it isn't?
Of course not, cause you don't know anything about it."
No, of course not. Nothing. You should humble yourself and realize that this isn't black and white, and plenty of non-ignorant smart people disagree with you. BTW, I know how to read, think, and shoot. Arrogance isn't the way to go here, just makes you seem rude and small.
So, if you'd like to do more reading about alternative perspectives,
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/02/rabbi/self-defense-tip-use-a-handgun-for-home-defense/
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/03/daniel-zimmerman/home-defense-firearms-a-long-gun-rebuttal/
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_118/400982_ARandapos_s_for_Home_Defense.html - in which some argue for your position and others argue against it. again: not black and white.
Plenty more on that side. People coming down on both sides.
Your words:
ReplyDelete"Implying that when someone asks "Do you really need a semi-auto rifle that shoots 30 bullets per mag?" they're somehow impugning your right to defend your family is a great example."
See, you did say that unless you are using some modern obscure definition for impugn that I've never heard of.
Sure there are plenty of things I can use to defend my family. I could use my sidearm, my shotty, I could even throw some karate at the bad guy... but why wouldn't I choose the best thing at my disposal?
That's why I said "Do you really have to ask?"
You can quote anybody you want but the reality is you have ZERO experience.
First its "ridiculous" to use an AR and now its "not so black and white" well it was pretty black and white when you were saying it was ridiculous wasn't it?
Oh, the reason its not so black and white is because you're now actually look at information from both sides and starting to see a common theme.
Here's the deal, a mossberg 500 can be picked up for less than 500 bucks, loaded with a few buckshot shells, and a child could use it well (especially a 20 gauge). If you have a very limited budget that is the best option, however, the trade off is precision and over-penetration.
A decent AR with a good light and mags can easily run around a grand plus the time and ammo it takes to get proficient with the weapon. This is more costly, however, if you put the money and time into it the payout is an easy to use precision instrument which can easily fend off more than enough attackers that might come against my family in your run of the mill home invasion.
I choose precision that is less likely to over-penetrate over a lack of precision that is likely to over-penetrate.
You should like that.
I use the AR because its what I have, its better, and I can defend my family from just about anything until someone comes to help.
The fact of the matter is that you just don't know anything more than what you read on the internet and arguing like that is really pointless. Go pick up an AR, shoot it, look at the ammo, and do the same with a shotgun loaded with buckshot.
Its good that you looked up some stuff. I encourage you to continue educating yourself especially with some hands on range time.
"First its "ridiculous" to use an AR and now its "not so black and white" well it was pretty black and white when you were saying it was ridiculous wasn't it?"
ReplyDeleteWho on earth are you quoting? Use Ctrl-F on this post - you are THE ONLY PERSON who has used that word. I don't even know how to respond to that. You're arguing against things I didn't say, dude. You're reading into what I've actually said and getting defensive. You're acting like I don't know what I'm talking about, because my position is different from yours.
You use the AR because it's what you have and YOU think it's better. I disagree. I'd favor maneuverability and something requiring less practice time. Something quicker to grab. Easier to aim under stress. Something less unwieldy. It's about the factors that matter most to you. 99.99999% of people don't need 30 bullets in a "home invasion" - and also, home invasions are incredibly rare.
Also, impugn != infringe.
ReplyDeleteI'm not quoting you, I'm capturing your implication in a single word.
ReplyDelete"Call a spade a spade. Unless you're living in a war zone or fending off a pack of zombies, claiming that it's just another "valid option" for meeting a need is a stretch. Using that logic, a machine gun is also a "valid option." "
Oh yeah, you aren't trying to say its ridiculous to have an AR in the suburbs at ALL, right?
Riiiight.
Oh and I suggest you get some time with an AR because maneuverability and ease of use are reasons why I choose the AR15 carbine.
My AR is very easy to grab from its rack six feet from my bed :)
Like I said, get some real experience on the subject then come back and we can have a real discussion. Until then its unfortunate but you're just arguing from ignorance.
im·pugn
ReplyDelete[im-pyoon]
verb (used with object)
1. to challenge as false (another's statements, motives, etc.); cast doubt upon.
2. Archaic. to assail (a person) by words or arguments; vilify.
3. Obsolete. to attack (a person) physically.
in·fringe
[in-frinj] verb, in·fringed, in·fring·ing.
verb (used with object)
1. to commit a breach or infraction of; violate or transgress: to infringe a copyright; to infringe a rule.
verb (used without object)
2. to encroach or trespass (usually followed by on or upon ): Don't infringe on his privacy.
In this context it is close enough.
I see; well, these symbols here: " " are called quotation marks, because they typically contain quotes.
ReplyDeletequote (kwt)
v. quot·ed, quot·ing, quotes
1. To repeat or copy the words of (another), usually with acknowledgment of the source.
2. To cite or refer to for illustration or proof.
3. To repeat a brief passage or excerpt from
What YOU did was misinterpret, and make assumptions, out of defensiveness. Shall I paste the dictionary definitions of those for you? I'm not sure they would help, if you think infringe and impugn mean the same thing, in any context.
I've fired ARs, guy. I completely disagree on the maneuverability front; a pistol or sawed-off shotgun is way easier to maneuver with. Plenty of people agree with me that for home-clearing there are better options. But best of luck to you.
["Call a spade a spade. Unless you're living in a war zone or fending off a pack of zombies, claiming that it's just another "valid option" for meeting a need is a stretch. Using that logic, a machine gun is also a "valid option." "
ReplyDeleteOh yeah, you aren't trying to say its ridiculous to have an AR in the suburbs at ALL, right?
Riiiight.]
Right. I said there are better options. You can't handle people disagreeing with you - if they disagree, they're "just arguing from ignorance" (see, that's how you use quotation marks). you're reading your own assumptions into my words.
You probably think a pistol grip shotgun is better for home defense too and 45's have more "knock down power".
ReplyDeleteI've tried to educate you. Now I'm just encouraging you to use google.
"You probably think"
ReplyDeleteThere are those assumptions again.
Yeah, its probably a mistake to assume you'd think too much but I like to give people the benefit of the doubt.
ReplyDeleteJust stop trying to pretend like you know more about these weapons than people who own and run them.
"Run them"? Hehehe...
ReplyDeleteJust keep thinkin' you're some kind of 'dangerous' authority figure on the subject, dude. You're one guy who owns some guns and has a different opinion than other guys who also own some guns. That's all.
You don't want dialogue...what you want is to be told "Right on!" You're completely incapable of processing disagreement without resorting to the kind of whiny games that my six-year-olds play. "Stop trying to pretend like..." Quoting dictionaries? I'm just disappointed that I let myself be provoked into stooping to that level; it won't happen again. Fact is, we don't have to agree but we should be civil. I enjoyed our conversation on the last post. This one was a disappointment.
Good luck with all of that owning and running. I'll just try to imagine what it's like to even touch a gun...maybe one day... ;)
You've forgotten something.
ReplyDeleteThe fact is you started with this:
"AR-15s are crappy for home defense if you live in a suburban area (which I'm assuming you do). A shotgun or handgun are much more effective. The likelihood that you'll need 30 bullets? Well, given that the chance of a home invasion is <3% (based on crime stats for the *entire* West), the chance that YOUR HOME will be invaded by more than one person, and you'll have a need to get off 30 shots is *so small* it's laughable."
Your argument is as follows:
1. Ar-15's are crappy for home defense in my context
2. A shotgun or handgun is much more effective
3. I'm not likely to need 30 bullets to defend my family
4. Multiple intruders are not likely to invade my home if someone does kick in my door
1 Is just patently false. Ar-15's are fantastic weapons for all sorts of roles. Thats why they exist. When a 5.56 ammo I use hits something it starts tumbling and loses lots of velocity. Oh, you also need to learn that there is different ammo for difference situations. I run lighter grain 5.56 ammo specifically to avoid overpenetration. Hollow points would make this even more effective.
2 The handgun claim is patently false. Everyone who knows anything about firearms knows rifle and shotgun ammo is a game stopper while pistol ammo might be a game stopper if you hit the right 2% of the body. couple that with the fact that a handgun is ten times harder to shoot accurately than a rifle or shotgun and your claim becomes laughable (based on data/experience, not uneducated opinion). Shotguns are very effective in terms of home defense but for every shot you have at least 9 steal 30 caliber ball bearings flying out of the muzzle. That means overpenetration and that means its harder to get all of those ball bearings in the target.
3 If i need any ammo i want as much as I can have and you would too. NOBODY says "man, I brought too much ammo to this fight" but plenty of dead people have thought "man, I didn't bring enough ammo". Success comes from planning for the worst and hoping for the best. Furthermore, 4 shotgun shells is 36 projectiles so you aren't really concerned with ammo dumping, you're concerned with cliche things you've heard on CNN or Fox.
You believe what you've been told to believe. Think for yourself.
4 This is just false. If a home invasion occurs (especially if they know someone is home) the odds are it will be 3 or more perps.
See, I'd be fine with you telling me I'm wrong when its not people just parroting things they've heard from other people.
Like I said, get educated. Look at the ballistics of the 5.56 round VS the ballistics of a standard pistol round VS a 00 buck 12 gauge blast. Go shoot some stuff and tell me what is easier to get more shots on target.
Well, I started by saying what I've determined through careful research, and still believe - I'm not sure who you think "told" me to believe things, but I'm not going to engage in any silliness debating that with you. Point is, I've read from people who say the same things you do, and read from others who agree with me, and ultimately I'm happy sticking with a shotgun. Having an AR is overkill here, and the odds don't justify the extra training and expense.
ReplyDeleteEither way, I appreciate the more measured response this time.
BTW: new research out on mental illness http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/01/health/study-finds-genetic-risk-factors-shared-by-5-psychiatric-disorders.html?hp&_r=0
ReplyDeleteReally interesting stuff.
If someone asks me what to buy for home defense I tell them to get a 20 gauge pump shotgun (remington 870 or mossberg 500) because nothing beats them in terms of the combination of affordability, ease of use, and brute force.
ReplyDeleteSo, I support your decision to stick with a shotgun. My only problem was that you seemed to be telling me it was overkill for MY application when that's an entirely subjective claim that overlooks the fact that buckshot is far more likely to over-penetrate than a small caliber rifle round like a .223/5.56.
A 12 ga is harder to control than a modern rifle and it isn't as accurate while distributing more payload than a modern AR style rifle. That's why I suggest the 20 ga because it has a smaller payload yet still with about the same punch as 2 44 magnums and it does that without the big "kick" of the 12 gauge.
Something a lot of people don't realize about the AR is that it has a spring in the buffer tube that absorbs most of the "kick" and that's why its a breeze to shoot well.